What Bible did Jesus Read from?

[Eccl12and13]

While reading a very informative topic a question came to mind. After doing a little searching for myself it seems that the earliest New Testament gosple was not available until about 40 A.D. With an approx. date of Jesus death around 30 A.D., the amount of time without any New Testament scriptures would be about 10 years. Meaning NO New Testament scriptures were around when Jesus was alive.

So what scriptures did Jesus read from? More importantly, when Jesus said the following,:

Matt.4
[4] But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Luke.4
[4] And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Just what words was He telling Man he should live by. One thing that should be noticed, Jesus did not say that the Jews should live by one set of God's words and the Gentiles another. His quote was, "MAN shall live by EVERY WORD that proceedeth out of the mouth of GOD!."

And when Paul made the following statement to Timothy,:

2Tim.3
[15] And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Just what scriptures could there have been around that would make him wise unto salvation? After all....the only scriptures Timothy had at the time were the OLD TESTAMENT!!

And again, when Paul said the following:

[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
[17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

was he not referring to the OLD TESTAMENT?

So just what were the scriptures Jesus said, ALL MAN SHALL LIVE BY if the New Testament did not exist? And if they were good enough to make Timothy wise until salvation, should not they still be good enough for us today?

After all, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" Acts 10:34. God would not give one person a way to salvation that would not be good for all!

 

[A-Christian]

Looks like Christ's sacrifice and the founding of the Christian church changed things a bit.
You don't have anything against the NT do you?

 

[allanpopa]

Jesus probably couldn't read, he knew and told stories.

The authors of the NT however were familiar with the Septuagint.

Allan

 

[stovebolts]

You would be correct, though incomplete in your assessment. I would urge you to do some homework of the early church, particularly of our present Canon of scripture.

In addition, do some homework on each of the communities, or the people that the NT letters were written to and the circumstances in which our current Canon was written. ;)

In large, the better you understand the Old Testament (Old Covenant), the clearer the New Testament (New Covenant) becomes.

I for one, have much, much to learn

 

[Free]

Jesus probably couldn't read, he knew and told stories.

That is highly unlikely, not only because of the passage below, but because many/most Jewish boys learned the Tanakh. Learning the Jewish Scriptures was central.

Luke 4:15-17, "15 And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. 17 And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written"

 

[Vic C.]

Good scripture, Free.

Just what words was He telling Man he should live by. One thing that should be noticed, Jesus did not say that the Jews should live by one set of God's words and the Gentiles another. His quote was, "MAN shall live by EVERY WORD that proceedeth out of the mouth of GOD!."

As it was mentioned, indeed the written word they had was the Septuagint.

God's word was passed not only by written word, but orally also. Jesus taught many things that were spoken before Him. He gave a specific commandment to His Disciples.

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

That would bee all things, whether they were written or passed along orally. Paul also received Divine instructions on who and what to teach, so his words cannot be dismissed either. To do so would be heretical by just about every Christian sect there is.

Oh, it is also against this site's TOS. ;)

 

[duval]

Jesus quoted from the Septuagint. However, He was and is the Word, John 1.

 

[Eccl12and13]

Looks like Christ's sacrifice and the founding of the Christian church changed things a bit.
You don't have anything against the NT do you?

Of course not. When Jesus said that man should live by every word of God that would include those words not yet on written also. Man should live by THE BIBLE; Gen. to Rev.!

2Tim.3
[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

The point of this thread was to bring out the fact that when Jesus man should live by every word of God, the ONLY word of God available at the time was the OT. And if a man lived just by those OT scriptures and died with a good report he would be saved.

Paul says the same thing to Timothy:

2Tim.3
[15] And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Now the ONLY scriptures available to Timothy during his lifetime were the OT. Yet Paul tells Timothy, those OT scriptures are enough to make him wide, even unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

Now here is a question, What would that mean one would have to do for salvation if they were to live by the only scriptures available to them which were th OT?

 

[dadof10]

Jesus probably couldn't read, he knew and told stories.

I'm curious as to how you came to this conclusion.

 

[dadof10]

The point of this thread was to bring out the fact that when Jesus man should live by every word of God, the ONLY word of God available at the time was the OT. And if a man lived just by those OT scriptures and died with a good report he would be saved.

The early Church did not hold the doctrine of Sola-Scriptura, they also had (and still have) the teaching authority of the Church (oral Tradition) to guide them to all Truth.

"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. (2Thessalonians (RSV) 2)

Paul says the same thing to Timothy:

2Tim.3
[15] And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Now the ONLY scriptures available to Timothy during his lifetime were the OT. Yet Paul tells Timothy, those OT scriptures are enough to make him wide, even unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

It doesn't say "enough", it says 'able", nor does Paul ever say that Scripture is sufficient.

Now here is a question, What would that mean one would have to do for salvation if they were to live by the only scriptures available to them which were th OT?

They would still be taught the same doctrines by the Church, so salvation would be by Grace alone.

 

[wavy]

That is highly unlikely, not only because of the passage below, but because many/most Jewish boys learned the Tanakh. Learning the Jewish Scriptures was central.

Jesus may have known how to read but most people in this era were illiterate. They learned from the bible by its being read in the synagogues. This is how, according to our best estimates, most people in antiquity 'read' things...some one else who could read had to read for them.

As far as which bible Jesus used, that's hard to say. He probably didn't own one (it would cost far too much money, so access to the bible would have been through the synagogue). He possibly knew Hebrew versions of the scriptures, maybe the Targumim.

But we can't know if Jesus used the Septuagint. Septuagint quotes featuring in the gospels and throughout the rest of the NT simply reflect what the authors of these documents had before them. It's like if you had the NASB handy when going over at home what your preacher may have taught in another English version.

The Septuagint was the bible of the early church. That tells us nothing about the language of the bible Jesus was familiar with.


Thanks,
Eric

 

[wavy]

You would be correct, though incomplete in your assessment. I would urge you to do some homework of the early church, particularly of our present Canon of scripture.

In addition, do some homework on each of the communities, or the people that the NT letters were written to and the circumstances in which our current Canon was written. ;)

In large, the better you understand the Old Testament (Old Covenant), the clearer the New Testament (New Covenant) becomes.

I for one, have much, much to learn

Two books for you:

An Introduction to the New Testament -- R.E. Brown, Doubleday, 1997.

Exploring the Origins of the Bible: Canon Formation in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective -- Evans, Tov, eds., Barker Academic, 2008.

 

[Rick W]

Christ IS the New Testament.

Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Exo 21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.


Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
Matthew 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

How many times does Christ do this? He IS God and taught the New Testament long before it was penned.

 

[Bick]

Yes, it had to be the Hebrew Scriptures.

Some scholars believe Jesus quoted from the Septuagint, the Hebrew Scriptures translated into Greek.

Seems logical to me.

 

[mondar]

That is highly unlikely, not only because of the passage below, but because many/most Jewish boys learned the Tanakh. Learning the Jewish Scriptures was central.

Jesus may have known how to read but most people in this era were illiterate. They learned from the bible by its being read in the synagogues.

I agree with Free here. I have no scholars to quote (but neither does anyone else here). However, I remember reading someone talking about the Jews of Jesus era having fairly close to universal literacy with their synagogue schools.

 

[wavy]

I agree with Free here. I have no scholars to quote (but neither does anyone else here). However, I remember reading someone talking about the Jews of Jesus era having fairly close to universal literacy with their synagogue schools.

See red above. You shouldn't be so quick to judge others on your own lack of knowledge.

One of the most definitive studies on ancient literacy is W. Harris, Ancient Literacy, Harvard, 1989, who estimates the literacy rate among the population throughout the empire during the time in question at about 10-15% (i.e., 85-90% of people were illiterate).

That's just in general. On Jewish literacy, the important study is C. Hezser, Jewish Literacy in Roman Palestine, Tubingen, 2001, who concludes that 'the average Jewish literacy rate (of whatever degree) must be considered to have been lower than the average Roman rate', p. 496.

You and Free are simply wrong.


Thanks,
Eric

 

[wavy]

bump for mondar

 

[Free]

You and Free are simply wrong.

Two sources do not an argument make.

 

[wavy]

You and Free are simply wrong.

Two sources do not an argument make.

Yes, they do. It is a valid appeal to authority. Now, you find me a more authoritative standard source.

But the sting goes to mondar, for assuming every one else fails to study matters which they discuss. I can quote authoritative sources for the claims I make.

Thanks,
Eric

 

[mechanicdb]

Could it be that Jesus was referring to books (or scrolls, parchment, etc.) that were not published in the Bible? Many people know that there were other writings from that time and before. If not, why not?


I mean, of course, besides the fact as was pointed out earlier that Jesus IS the Word.